Let’s talk for a minute about the law. Most legal systems are based on two things: the protection of certain general principles that are considered fundamental truths by the society in question, and a long history of precedents matching punishments with violations.

Criminal law, for the most part, is fairly straightforward. Not much has changed in the nature of criminal acts for centuries, if not millennia. Make appropriate allowance for social class restrictions and technology and you have most of it covered. Fraud still remains fraud, for example, even if it is conducted over the internet. What little remains can be summed up as the presentation and verification of evidence. Who can testify, who and what is considered most reliable, what cultural and social attributes are automatically considered unquestionable?

More frequently useful, and often overlooked in games, are the commercial and civil courts. The civil courts are all about someone doing something with someone else’s property, whether it is being harmed by that property, purchasing that property under false pretences, violating someone’s posession of that property, or whatever. They measure the harm done to someone and impose financial compensation. Take a look at a standard insurance policy, for example; every microscopic line of fine print is the result of someone cheating, or attempting to cheat, the law. Similarly, every line of public liability law stems from someone claiming that someone else permitted or caused them to come to harm through negligance or intent; every componant of a car derives from a string of automobile accidents.

Ownership and authority are civil matters: who is permitted to do what with someone else’s property, for example. In the middle ages, it was quite permitted for a freeman to travel anywhere he wanted in search of employment, and quite routine. Permission had to be obtained from the local representative of the owner of the lands into which the freeman had been born; he in turn set a fee which the freeman had to pay to the owner of the lands each year in exchange for his liberty to wander. Serfs and Freemen had an obligation to perform certain services on behalf of the land owner in return for the right to farm his own personal allotment the rest of the year, though the amounts differed from social class to social class, and year to year, and Lord to Lord. Prosperous individuals could pay someone else to work their share of this burdon – the baker or blacksmith was able to satisfy his farming obligation by paying someone to work on his behalf, or was exempted. In addition, in return for the right to work his professional trade, a licence fee had to be paid, usually in the form of so much product of his labours – so many loaves of bread or horse shoes (or whatever) per month. The mills and bellows and other professional tools were usually the property of another (usually the Lord, who bought them as an investment), and also had to be rented, and so on; it was quite rare for a craftsman to own his own equipment.

In fact, just about anything was negotiable with hard currency except in times of war and strife, and sometimes even then. Many people in modern times consider this to be a modern corruption of the legal system, not realising how far back the historical precedents can be traced; in olden times, these arrangements were open and above board and public knowledge; now they considered immoral, and so are conducted furtively and secretly, but the reality hasn’t changed – the wealthy can get away with far more than the poverty-stricken. As late as the turn of the century, in some places, it was quite legal to buy your way out of dury juty, and it was considered revolutionary when the wealthy were not permitted to buy their way out of the draft in the US during World War I (an amendment to the draft law that would have permitted it was narrowly defeated).

An even more important consideration is civil rights, violation of which is ALSO a matter for the civil courts. It can be argued that these are the descendants of the local codes of conduct that every village and township had in fuedal times, which determined the fines to be paid (to the Lord) for violations of public morals and peace. In fact, jury trials also stem from these precedents by long tradition; in the middle ages it was often even more important to be popular than to be wealthy, as guilt or innocence in all civil complaints and many minor criminal matters (those not directly affecting the Lord) were decided by the most respected of the accused’s neighbours. That’s worth remembering, the next time a celebrity gets off with a wrist-slap – that it’s nothing new! The concept of such a jury being biased against an individual was known, but was deemed unimportant except in capital cases or crimes against the Crown. In all other cases, the risk of being found guilty because of a bad reputation amongst your neighbours was considered an incentive to behave yourself and not make enemies!

It’s when these principles are applied to an unfamiliar setting within an RPG that things get interesting. How might a mage harm another, and how would civil laws change to accommodate these harms? Is the Lord entitled to a fee for every spell he permits the mage to cast, or perhaps an annual fee? How much stronger are the legal protections of the Church when the Gods’ will is expressed patently through a cleric’s miracles? Druids are often considered the protectors of the earth; how are their rights accommodated, and can they trump those of a minor Lord? There are innumerable questions that can be posed, and they can have a direct impact on what the PCs in a campaign are permitted to do and what they aren’t, on who has authority over them, and so on.

This is one of my favorite topics in Superhero campaigns. Not only because I am a fan of courtroom drama, but because superheros are in the profession of law-enforcement. Can a masked character even testify in court? Is he forced to divulge his real name? If not, how can his identity be ascertained? Is he required to read a suspect his rights before attempting to apprehend the villain? Is he responsible for collatoral damage – and can he be sued? Telepathy, Precognition – in fact, almost any form of enhanced sense – may create trouble because the evidence against the bad guys is thrown out of court, AS IS any evidence that would not have been found without that lead (“fruit of the poisonous tree”).

In one memorable plotline in my campaign, one of the superhero team was accused of murder. Prosecuting him was a Special Prosecutor appointed by the court, Perry Mason. Defending him was Denny Crane of Crane, Poole, and Schmidt [Boston Legal]… I got a sore throat from all the dialogue I had to read that day, but on several occasions the players were in histerics from laughter, as each side did their utmost to outmanouver the opposition, usually with sprinklings of wit and sarcasm and flashes of genius. Ultimately the question came down to jurisdictional considerations, since the PC was from another dimension, and he got off on a technicality! (One of the most entertaining scenes: The PC was a shapechanger whose normal appearance was that of a Gargoyle. Crane asked his expert witness what the law was concerning Gargoyles? The Answer: Federal and State laws don’t mention Gargoyles at all, and Boston only mentions them in the Building Codes, violation of which is a property offence. If anyone is injured by a Gargoyle, they are entitled to sue, but you wouldn’t lock up the statue…)

So spend a few minutes considering the laws of the realm in which your campaign takes place. What are the obligations of a citizen? Of a visitor? What rights and what responsibilities do the PCs have? What are they forbidden to do – and what can they buy their way out of? How will these change as they become wealthier, and more famous? And how can the GM use this information to complicate the PCs lives and entertain his players?

11 Responses to “Lore Enforcement: The Legal System in an RPG”

What a fascinating concept. I’ve always felt that PCs get away with a lot of criminal activity simply because they’re the heroes. They often brandish weapons, threaten harm, and kill evil doers all in the name of the greater good, even though in most cases it’s clearly illegal. For the first time ever the PCs in a campaign I was running last summer consulted a lawyer after being charged with a capital crime and facing execution. It was fun to role-play but ultimately proved that the heroes should just be allowed to do what’s fun for the players and screw the law.

One of those challenges I hardly managed to come up to is – a fantasy campaign with heroes who are hunted by the law (I’m currently working on it) and I have the feeling it’s hard to get them not to constantly run because they made mistakes. After all there is hardly a normal militia or guard who can deal with them without losing half their men…
I would appreciate any second thoughts on howto deal with this in an upcoming issue… ;)

I think it’d be even cooler to get a group understanding a legal system than for them to just see it in action; I’ve always loved bricolage and word-twisting, and trying to work around a legal system through technicalities sounds like the perfect way to twine them together.

@Ameron: Players have to know that their character’s actions have consequences, and that they may be called to justify those actions. A careless word at the wrong time and place can start a war, a careless act can result in trial and punishment. The key is to ensure that the result of a ‘guilty’ verdict can act as a springboard to new adventures. Nothing gets Players riled up quite as much as an NPC framing them for a crime, for example. Rather than the hangman’s noose, forcing the PCs to undertake a near-suicidal quest in order to repay their debt to society permits you to go all out to try and secure a ‘guilty’ verdict.

@TheLemming: the big trick with an outlaw campaign is to be selective. While there will be some group chasing them down – and potentially tracking the group using magic, so they keep reacquiring the trail – the leader of the hunting party should be fallable, so that even a mistake just puts the PCs under additional time pressure. For anyone else to identify the PCs as responsible, they first have to recognise the PC as a wanted person, then have to decide how to react; some will offer favourable terms just to get them out of their shop or away from their stall before they go for help. Others will look to cash in on a reward – but the watch won’t usually respond to a brawl taking place indoors except in a public place like an inn. Some will simply deny them services, or will sense desperation and jack up the prices. Some may wish to ‘join the cause’. And some shady types may offer to assist them, for a price. But it all hinges on recognition – in an era without photographs. Key to successfully running a ‘vigilantes on the run’ campaign or scenario is to keep in mind what the authorities know, and to find ways of letting the players know that the authorities know. Having the PCs encounter ‘wanted’ posters is always helpful. Having them attract attention because they are ‘in a hurry’ can help slow them down. Having the hunt wait in ambush because the PCs are becoming predictable also helps. And if there’s no militia or guard that can stop them without losing half their men, that’s much the same as against any band of outlaws or any military action – it’s what they were signed on to do (whether the NPCs like it or not).

@Ravyn – it can be a lot of fun. I normally twist things around to some variation on the US Legal System simply because most people are at least somewhat familiar with it from many years of television. You need the PCs to have a lawyer who they can trust (at least somewhat), who can act as their guide through the scenario, and you need to so arrange the legal arguements and judges rulings so that the verdict is 50/50 – with the player’s testimony to swing the balance one way or another. You also need contingincy plans in case the PCs try and get clever. Without a time machine, I’m afraid that you can’t get your wish, but I can email you the scenario privately (it’s too big to post as a blog entry) if you’re interested.

Re : superheroic legal wrinkles.
I’ve run a great many super-heroic campaigns over the years, and have developed a few basic “rules” that I apply in Contemporay game-worlds. Use the current legal system (avoiding the need for massive legal briefings for players), and add on only the “required” evolutions that cover the use of super-powers. Consider that new law is always based on perceived need for society… and phrased by humans with all sort of flaws (each one a potential sub-plot when new laws are being debated!). Boil the law *applied* down to a very few “Principles” that you can present to players. Thus they memorise and can deduce/extemporize permissible actions and consequences. A few examples :
“Mind Control frees from responsability” (i.e. *Mind Controllers* are responible for the acts of their puppets)
“The accused has the right to know who is accusing him” (masks off in the courtroom, gentlemen!)
2)Non-utopian governments will always seek to control super-powers either via legal obligations, social pressure, military threat, moral conditioning, or a barrage of all of these and more. They will develop mechanisms to punish law-breakers and try hard to punish those who “stray” to bring them back under control. The question of how effective they’ll be is one of ressources, willpower, mobility, etc. These are all good justifications for extreme efforts/Major GM-threats to hold over sociopathic super”heroes” or “done on the cheap” fallibility that allows PC Heroes to run around free.
Supplemental reading :
See the articles in Johnns web-column on improving armies for ideas on how to build a army capable of forcing super-heroes back onto the sraight-and-narrow. Low-power humans will try to combine their strengths to build a C.O.M.M.A.N.D.E.R. superiority (in as many as possibile of the following aspects : Command, Organisation, Movement, Manoeuvre, Armament, Number, Discipline, Endurance, Reactivity).
Social pressure is fairly cheap and effective and a good source for some PC moral anguish/indignation (see my article “Face Off” – RPGTips N°298 – for showing how nasty a GM can get when a supers Secret Identity isn’t sufficiently well maintained….).

That’s very similar to the way I approach the subject, Loz. You can also add the legality of ‘confessions’ obtained telepathically to the list amongst many others. One of the key questions for me, which you point out, is the question of wearing masks to testify. It doesn’t matter whether you permit it or not, you end up with thorny ramifications; superheros won’t testify if they have to reveal their secret identities, putting their loved ones in danger, and letting villains go free. Is it illegal to actually remove a villain’s mask before they are convicted? Or before they are arrested?

On the other hand, conclusive identification of a masked hero (or villain!) is impossible to establish. And how about the alien who has to wear a full-faced helmet because he can’t breathe the atmosphere? Or the arcane force for justice (or evil) who is nothing more than their suit of armour? The list of interesting side-wrinkles that you can throw into scenarios from this consideration alone is massive.

Another one that’s fun to play around with are concealed weapons… and so on and so forth.

Good article, I am having law problems in my D&D campaign at the moment. The Characters are all very lawfull followers of St Cuthbert. They have recently attacked a manor house belonging to Sir Henry (An evil necromancer who was also harbouring vampires). Now Sir Henry is dead what happens to the estate, who do the tenements now pay taxes to?
I ruled that the estate reverts to the Kings lands awaiting a new lord. The party are allowed to stay in the estate as caretakers until a new owner is appointed.
I had another quandrum about an escaped murderer, the party found out that he wasn’t in fact a murderer but killed in self defence. The problem is the victim was very popular so if they took the escapee back he would almost certainly get hung. What is the “Lawful” thing to do?

First off : is this question on-topic for this thread? I’ll let the moderators decide and possibly split off these comments onto another thread.

Secondly : Possibly the right question to be asking is “what is the Good thing to do?”. Lawful and Good are often confused.
After much debate this is the version of the Law Vs Chaos Good vs Evil debate our local gaming association adopted. (N.B. Note that Alignments get tweaked and ocasionnaly downright messed around with by the games owners. Check the latest text on the different alignments.)
Law vs Chaos is generally related to the point at which a player character decides “I am / am not going to subsume myself in this society. I will/will not allow this cultures laws to limit my personal choices. I will/will not sacrifice the power to decide my personal choice of action about XXX in order to ensure this society remains stable.” N.B. Wether the Laws *themselves* are moraly acceptable (especially when voyaging in another country with different, possibly repugnant, laws) is another question. Slavery may be legal, but its’ *morality* may be rejected by some and accepted by others. Law often evolves to codify morality and punish deviations from it…. but morality nearly always evolves ahead of Law which leads to… clashes (e.g. The American Civil War).
Good vs Evil , we decided was best described as Altruism (Good) vs Egotism (Evil). Good = “I’ll spend time and effort to help others” (specific reasons for *why* they do this are hugely variable….) vs Evil = “I will only spend effort to advance my personal cause”,
so the case you described would be a classic Law vs Good situation. What is good for society (Law) vs what is good for the unjustly accused man?
The society will probably initially insist “This man *must* be punished”. Does the society have a procedure for investigating protestations of accusations of injustice? Just with this one question I hope to point out that the actual decision to be made cannot be decided by me or others without huge amounts of debate around large chunks of information on the cultures laws and custom and the alignments of every member in the group who helps to decide what the decision will be…. Is the group more Lawful or more Good? The “self-defence” argument is acceptable in Law? I could go on…..
Personal note : It’s not really, I feel, our place to decide what is truly a decision only the players can make. Explanation : I feel it is very often a huge mistake for a GM to try impose upon a player what his character should be feeling unless there in an imminent egregious character class mindset violation .
In the meantime, I hope my comments have help shed some light on an often somewhat murky/misunderstood corner of the alignment system and the fun a GM can spark his players into having with it…
P.S. My suggestion in the *specific* case cited above would be to suggest (via the “self-defense” NPC) that the player characters escort the innocent man and protect him whilst the erroneous accusation is resolved justly…. body-guarding him, fending off outraged authorities (maybe even their own superiors!), digging up proof (witnesses, etc)…. That could be your next scenario or two right there…. :)

The escaped criminal certainly created a few aruments with the player characters. The Paladin was all for letting him go, the monk was quite happy to see him hanged (when found guilty), and the cleric wanted to try to prove his innocence. In the end the Paladin went to the city Lord (bypassed the local law) and pursuaded him to let the escapee off with a large fine. Ruffeling a few feathers on the way. Good yes, Lawful well maybe..

I’ve never been a stickler for legal process and law, but after reading this and these comments, I think I’m going to flesh out some of the legal details of the Kingdoms in my home-brew world – what an opportunity to give different lands a unique feel! I feel that having a law or legal code also creates an opportunity for your more detail-oriented players to shine: What to do when the local burgomaster has become a target of an assassination plot, but he nor his court heed the player’s warnings that a local organization or political enemy wants him dead? The legal code could possibly become another avenue for the players to exploit with some clever thought.

@WarlordGDX: Glad you found it inspirational, it makes the effort of writing it worthwhile. When constructing your legal codes, don’t forget to allow for two things: (1) The psychological effects on the populace; and (2) the potential social and political consequences of different legal codes butting heads.

1. Everyone knows that in the US, you have the right to legal advice and have the right not to say anything – basic miranda rights. How much does that influance, and reflect, the attitude of the ordinary citizen toward the law and it’s enforcers? It seems to me that it makes it more of a ‘catch me if you can’ game to a lot of people. At the same time, it makes the society more open and less secretive in a number of ways, as the expectation is that the ‘honest citizen’ has nothing to hide; outlaws are integrated into society. Whenever you codify even the style of law and law-enforcement in a region of your campaign world, consider how it will influance the local population, and what it says about the attitudes of the local population.

2. Someone commits a crime under the local law and then skips into a neighbouring province where what they did is not considered illegal (possibly because the victims are not accorded full or even partial ‘human rights’). Is there some sort of extradition process? Can the victim’s state send people in after them without it being considered an act of war? How will such incidents shape the political landscape – and how will currently political relations and ambitions and alliances change these considerations? A retro-active extradition treaty can cause a major shakeup, as seemingly honest citizens become concerned about their dirty laundry becoming public!

Paying around with anything with big repercussions like this is always an entertaining mind game, so have fun! Make some laws for the player’s comfort and some for their discomfort, while you’re at it….